At Davos, Why Is No One Talking About the Poor?

[G_j]

http://business.time.com/2012/01/28/at-davos-why-is-no-one-talking-about-the-poor/


At Davos, Why Is No One Talking About the Poor?
By Roya Wolverson | @royaclare | January 28, 2012


I first learned about the World Economic Forum at Davos as a greenhorn in college. At the time, I was knee-deep in coursework on economic development, a field that extols the social and economic virtues of tending to the world’s poor.

I was somewhere between Amartya’s Sen‘s 1999 Nobel Prize-winning book Development as Freedom, a cult sensation among wonky Ivy Leaguers and 20-something granolas bound for the Peace Corps, and Joseph Stiglitz‘s 2002 bestseller Globalization and Its Discontents, when I first dreamed of going to Davos to take part in the lofty mission of “solving the world’s problems.”

(LIST: The Heavy Hitters of Davos 2012)

Those were the years when globalization really earned its bad rap. And as a result, a counter movement, rooted in aspirations of global equity and social good, began to take hold. Anti-globalization protests so disrupted the WEF in 2001 that its organizers had to relocate the event to New York the following year. The anti-globalization movement even erected its own conference, the World Social Forum, in Porto Alegre, Brazil, to serve as a populist counterweight to the elite Davos powwow. By 2002, Porto Alegre had drawn in 50,000 people, triple the number from the previous year. Even the Economist conceded that, in light of popular backlash, the march toward globalization could yet be reversed:

The economic history of the twentieth century is full of reminders that the move towards globalisation is not inevitable. War in 1914 brought an end to a period of economic openness and integration unparalleled even today. The 1930s were more painful than necessary precisely because of beggar-thy-neighbour policies adopted in the wake of the Depression. It is not impossible that governments today will turn their backs on open trade and capital flows. Many of those in Porto Alegre would welcome such a policy reversal.
In WEF-like circles, the biggest opponents of globalization then were the defenders of the world’s poor, who cited a growing gap between the fortunes of Western economies and those of the developing world. As the Economist noted:



Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/01/28/at-davos-why-is-no-one-talking-about-the-poor/#ixzz1km9HTv5T

[TheMastersNemesis]

1. One World Government

That is because the poor are irrelevant. They are close to achieving a "new world order". The "new world order" is being achieved by economic initiatives. The blather about the UN is just diversionary.

The IMF, World Bank, oligarchs and conservatives have used globalization as a way to flatten the planet economically. It is the best way to achieve a unitary world government. People would never vote for such a scheme politically. If you erase ALL economic boundaries then you can erase all the political boundaries.

Globalization and "trickle down" economics works very well for oligarchs, the superrich and their allies no matter what country they are in. Ronald Reagan and Thatcher started the ball rolling years ago. Austerity is only for the poor and disenfranchised. By keeping the Middle East stirred up and other various ways they keep the less fortunate in their place.

What is happening should be very obvious. Our American oligarchs like Coors, the Kochs, Anschutz et al have their operatives all over the planet. Why have seen so many conservative governments in recent years?

[socialist_n_TN]

2. Pretty simple really.......

None of them are poor.